Current Affairs Vaccinations (v2.0)

Status
Not open for further replies.
'cuz we got antibiotics....Texas State Rep flexes his immense mental muscle for us all to see....

“They want to say people are dying of measles. Yeah, in third-world countries they’re dying of measles,” Zedler said Tuesday. “Today, with antibiotics and that kind of stuff, they’re not dying in America.”

Texas Idiot Quote re Measles link
Niw Rand Paul is saying it is fine if people don’t get vaccinate their kids - and he is a docter ffs.
During a Senate Health Committee hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized the idea that parents should be required to vaccinate their children and perpetuated the notion that vaccines themselves could cause harm.
The speech, which came during the opening moments of the hearing, was framed as an argument in favor of personal liberty, a posture that Paul routinely adopts. But in offering his thoughts, the Kentucky Republican furthered the argument that it is socially reasonable not to vaccinate your kids—a mindset that the scientific community says is already worsening communal health crises.

“As we contemplate forcing parents to choose this or that vaccine, I think it’s important to remember that force is not consistent with the American story, nor is force consistent with the liberty our forefathers sought when they came to America,” said Paul, reading off a paper. “I don't think you have to have one or the other, though. I'm not here to say don’t vaccinate your kids. If this hearing is for persuasion I’m all for the persuasion. I’ve vaccinated myself and I’ve vaccinated my kids. For myself and my children I believe that the benefits of vaccines greatly outweighing the risks, but I still don’t favor giving up on liberty for a false sense of security.”

Paul didn’t just make the case that vaccines should be voluntary, however. He used his platform at the hearing to affirmatively push the perception that they are potentially problematic. “It is wrong to say that there are no risks to vaccines,” said Paul. “Even the government admits that children are sometimes injured by vaccines.” Virtually all medical literature shows that the benefits of vaccines dramatically outweigh the limited risks. And many of the more outlandish conspiracies (including supposed links of vaccines to autism) have been discredited. But, here too, Paul sounded a skeptical note, suggesting that the data simply wasn’t large enough to give parents a convincing case. “Now proponents of mandatory government vaccination argue that parents who refuse to vaccinate their children risk spreading these diseases to immunocompromised community,” he declared. “There doesn't seem to be enough evidence of this happening to be recorded as a statistic.”
 
rnxvh1djtwk21.png
 
@Bruce Wayne but you've got this totally wrong. A spotty teenager, sat in their bedroom with a pasta strainer on their head doesn't need the wonder of evidence.

Scienticially reputable sources placed in a forum where they can be correctly critiqued by the scientific and medical community has nothing on a YouTube video.
 
Well, this thread is all a little one-sided. Allow me to throw a stone in the pond.

The consistent newspaper scare tactic of highlighting extreme individual data points to make the argument is scientifically worthless.

Studies are better, but if you want to argue there are no problems associated with vaccinations, then friends I have a carefully maintained bridge that - lucky you - has just become available.

Here’s a piece on measles that illustrates the point that there are always trade-offs - and it may well be that the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks:


Fun fact - the measles vaccine was so powerful that it actually worked before it was released ;)

In England - a dramatic decrease in deaths before the introduction of the measles vaccine in 1968
 
Well, this thread is all a little one-sided. Allow me to throw a stone in the pond.

The consistent newspaper scare tactic of highlighting extreme individual data points to make the argument is scientifically worthless.

Studies are better, but if you want to argue there are no problems associated with vaccinations, then friends I have a carefully maintained bridge that - lucky you - has just become available.

Here’s a piece on measles that illustrates the point that there are always trade-offs - and it may well be that the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks:


Fun fact - the measles vaccine was so powerful that it actually worked before it was released ;)
 

I post a piece illustrating some issues with measles vaccination and you come back with a hit piece on a critical study on polio.

Mmmkay.

Actually, we see the same phenomenon here - namely a large decline in the disease before introduction of the vaccine - in this case the spike in incidence was possibly due to introduction of DDT:

55621

source: http://vaxinfostarthere.com/did-vaccines-save-us/

But also there was a redefinition of polio in the wake of the vaccine that brought incidence down further - see: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2015/07/polio-wasnt-vanquished-it-was-redefined/
 
Niw Rand Paul is saying it is fine if people don’t get vaccinate their kids - and he is a docter ffs.
During a Senate Health Committee hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized the idea that parents should be required to vaccinate their children and perpetuated the notion that vaccines themselves could cause harm.
The speech, which came during the opening moments of the hearing, was framed as an argument in favor of personal liberty, a posture that Paul routinely adopts. But in offering his thoughts, the Kentucky Republican furthered the argument that it is socially reasonable not to vaccinate your kids—a mindset that the scientific community says is already worsening communal health crises.

“As we contemplate forcing parents to choose this or that vaccine, I think it’s important to remember that force is not consistent with the American story, nor is force consistent with the liberty our forefathers sought when they came to America,” said Paul, reading off a paper. “I don't think you have to have one or the other, though. I'm not here to say don’t vaccinate your kids. If this hearing is for persuasion I’m all for the persuasion. I’ve vaccinated myself and I’ve vaccinated my kids. For myself and my children I believe that the benefits of vaccines greatly outweighing the risks, but I still don’t favor giving up on liberty for a false sense of security.”

Paul didn’t just make the case that vaccines should be voluntary, however. He used his platform at the hearing to affirmatively push the perception that they are potentially problematic. “It is wrong to say that there are no risks to vaccines,” said Paul. “Even the government admits that children are sometimes injured by vaccines.” Virtually all medical literature shows that the benefits of vaccines dramatically outweigh the limited risks. And many of the more outlandish conspiracies (including supposed links of vaccines to autism) have been discredited. But, here too, Paul sounded a skeptical note, suggesting that the data simply wasn’t large enough to give parents a convincing case. “Now proponents of mandatory government vaccination argue that parents who refuse to vaccinate their children risk spreading these diseases to immunocompromised community,” he declared. “There doesn't seem to be enough evidence of this happening to be recorded as a statistic.”

Ophthalmologist tbf and not even certified by a "real" board. His certification is through the board he himself founded not the one generally recognized as up to other board standards.
 
I post a piece illustrating some issues with measles vaccination and you come back with a hit piece on a critical study on polio.

Mmmkay.

Actually, we see the same phenomenon here - namely a large decline in the disease before introduction of the vaccine - in this case the spike in incidence was possibly due to introduction of DDT:

View attachment 55621

source: http://vaxinfostarthere.com/did-vaccines-save-us/

But also there was a redefinition of polio in the wake of the vaccine that brought incidence down further - see: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2015/07/polio-wasnt-vanquished-it-was-redefined/

Know your reference source.
Yours backs Wakefield.
 
I post a piece illustrating some issues with measles vaccination and you come back with a hit piece on a critical study on polio.

Mmmkay.
I come back with an article from a epidemiologist with a PhD who highlighted numerous 'errors' (he goes as far as saying egregious) and misguided statements.

He doesn't even highlight that Roman Bystrianyk is an author rather than a medical professional and that his co-writer was a nephrologist (kidneys).

The point was to perhaps question the validity of the gentleman's article based on the 'suspected' flaws in previous articles, namely on polio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top